The 1947 - Present Chevrolet & GMC Truck Message Board Network







Register or Log In To remove these advertisements.

Go Back   The 1947 - Present Chevrolet & GMC Truck Message Board Network > General Truck Forums > Suspension

Web 67-72chevytrucks.com


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-25-2015, 02:30 PM   #1
earl84
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Montrose, CO
Posts: 972
2500 versus 2600 in rear for soft ride

I currently have 2500 bags with Schrader valves on the rear of my 66 C20. I need to get new shocks, since I don't really know how old mine are, and I'm pretty sure they are bottoming out occasionally. I relocated the shock mounts using the old mounts, like frizzlefry and ScotI did.
However, it does ride a little harsher than I was hoping for. Would the 2600's ride a little softer since they will have a little less pressure for the same ride height (I think)? FYI, I live in the mountains in Colorado (jst moved), and have 240 pounds of sand in the bed for traction.
earl84 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2015, 01:37 AM   #2
SCOTI
Registered User
 
SCOTI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: DALLAS,TX
Posts: 21,910
Re: 2500 versus 2600 in rear for soft ride

How much pressure is it requiring to achieve your ride height?
__________________
67SWB-B.B.RetroRod
64SWB-Recycle
89CCDually-Driver/Tow Truck
99CCSWB Driver
All Fleetsides
@rattlecankustoms in IG

Building a small, high rpm engine with the perfect bore, stroke and rod ratio is very impressive.
It's like a highly skilled Morrocan sword fighter with a Damascus Steel Scimitar.....

Cubic inches is like Indiana Jones with a cheap pistol.
SCOTI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2015, 12:10 PM   #3
earl84
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Montrose, CO
Posts: 972
Re: 2500 versus 2600 in rear for soft ride

With the sand in the bed, it's at about 48-50 psi.
earl84 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2015, 12:32 PM   #4
SCOTI
Registered User
 
SCOTI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: DALLAS,TX
Posts: 21,910
Re: 2500 versus 2600 in rear for soft ride

2600's would require less air psi for the same height as the 2500's. I wouldn't think the ~50psi is excessive. But, if you feel it is, the larger bag would require less psi.

I would do shocks first & make a decision after re-testing.
__________________
67SWB-B.B.RetroRod
64SWB-Recycle
89CCDually-Driver/Tow Truck
99CCSWB Driver
All Fleetsides
@rattlecankustoms in IG

Building a small, high rpm engine with the perfect bore, stroke and rod ratio is very impressive.
It's like a highly skilled Morrocan sword fighter with a Damascus Steel Scimitar.....

Cubic inches is like Indiana Jones with a cheap pistol.
SCOTI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2015, 05:59 PM   #5
earl84
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Montrose, CO
Posts: 972
Re: 2500 versus 2600 in rear for soft ride

Yep, that's pretty much the same plan I was thinking since either way I need the shocks replaced. Thanks for the replies.
earl84 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2015, 07:40 PM   #6
502ms
Registered User
 
502ms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,523
Re: 2500 versus 2600 in rear for soft ride

agreed. change shocks. I recommend the QA-1 Street Shock. They have 18 way adjustability for compression/rebound....awesome

....night and day over anything drop shock or Monroe can do
__________________
Best Regards,
Leon M.
502ms is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:47 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright 1997-2022 67-72chevytrucks.com